|
| Interesting article. I read it the whole way through.
I would put technologies into two categories.
1. Operation decoupling
2. Yield Increasing, cost decreasing
3. Analyzing/data
Some precision technologies, or all from a marketing standpoint, purport to increase yield and profit directly. Some technologies make the performance of the operation more predictable, and in that way allow true causation to be more clearly seen. Some technologies only report on performance of some metric. And some technologies exist on a continuum of all three.
A yield monitor would only be in category 3, an automated header or combine management system would be in category 1 and 2 perhaps.
A planter down pressure control system could be in 1 and 2
The point I am making is that the dawn of the precision farming age started with products in the third category. So much investment and promise is directed at analysis and data, whereas it is only much more recently that products have started to fill in that allow you to start seeing the true impact of each operation in the field.
This is the basis of our current planter automation strategy.
https://dawnequipment.wistia.com/medias/xh1tk00kcf
How can you make an assesment of the performance of your seed or fertilizer program when you have huge variability in the way each seed was planted across the field.
My hypothesis is that rather that go 3, 2, 1 as we have seen in the industry the precision technology pyramid should be in vested in by farmers as 1, 2, 3.
1. Make investments in equipment that will result in constant mechanical performance across field
2. Invest in technologies to maximize yield, now that you have the ability to see if the yield increase you see is due to that tech and not variation due to location
3. Invest in the ability to collect and analyze the information you collect and inform future decisions.
Too many people are getting sold on 3 but it is worthless until 1 catches up.
Joe | |
|
Another Thought on Data Value…
